That Awkward Moment When March Against Monsanto Used a Slavery Comparison

Hi guys. Just a quickie to get off my chest. Many of you know that I’m a co-founder of the new counter-protest against March Against Monsanto. I won’t re-hash the details, but see here for all the news articles, podcasts, and blogs on why we at March Against Myths About Modification (#MAMyths) are against misinformation mongering.

March Against Monsanto has been engaging with me and my friend Stephan, leader of the DC MAMyths chapter today. Here are a few telling tweets:

The good old stupid or enslaved farmer myth.

I wonder whether they know that patents expire and that there are open-source genetically engineered seeds? Or that conventional, organic, and even Non-GMO Project verified varieties (like Opal apples) are owned by companies as well? There are a few farmers on Twitter already taking offense to this tweet, and rightfully so.

The good old Indian farmers card

I wonder if they know that plenty of Indian farmers embrace biotech, and that there isn’t any causative link between genetic engineering and Indian farmer suicides? Also, I’ve been to India. I go every three years on average. I’ve also visited Indian farms. I’ve also seen malnourished Indian children who could probably do with some hearty GE food.

The tried but not true anti-corporate sentiment

If March Against Monsanto believes that there aren’t corporations with a lot of financial stake in the anti-biotech movement, they’re grossly misinformed.

Anyhow, I’m off to go buy some GM food. If you’re interested in countering March Against Monsanto’s misinformation mongering with me, join a local protest, or RSVP to our online rally!

4 Comments

If I wanted to fight against Ford Motor Company I would not start by try to prove that wheels aren’t round. The argument would make me look silly and if I were to win I would deprive the world of one of history’s greatest inventions.

GM is a tool, a technology, but then so is agriculture and animal husbandry they just happen to be older and they don’t seem to have a problem with those technologies..

Isn’t there a term for people who dislike and distrust technology? What should we call these people?

Technophobes, well not really they don’t hate all technologies (e.g. twitter or agriculture).

Luddites, again not quite accurate as the original Luddites were against technology supplanting artisans not just the tech itself.

Neo-Luddites, yes I think that will do. They don’t oppose all technology just that which they deem harmful to society, and they will use any mean necessary to disrupt its implementation. Just ask the admittedly extreme cases of the E.L.F. or Ted Kaczynski.

While the anti-GMO crowd has mostly stuck to fear-mongering, character assassination, and disseminating false information so far it’s really not too hard to imagine them moving beyond economic sabotage.

But then that’s slippery slope that we need not descend, them being blatantly wrong should be enough reason for us to oppose them.

I made this point in another thread- Monsanto has done a lot of corrupt business practices, but you cant link all of biotech to one bad behemoth. That’s like disliking computers because of Microsoft’s bad track record. The biotech industry would be MUCH better off if Monsanto was taken off the field.

Nothing is wrong with GMOs, the science is ironclad, however a lot is wrong with Monsanto and their pesticide usage. The MAM crowd is focusing on the wrong thing. Disliking Microsoft for its business practices does not mean you dislike computers. Same goes with Monsanto. The biotech world would be a lot better off if Monsanto was removed from the industry. Same goes for Bayer and Dow and DuPont, but Monsanto is the most egregious offender. Glyphosate and now Enlist Duo ring a bell? The fact is a monopoly in any business is prone to corruption and that is what Monsanto is fast becoming- especially with their buyout of Synerga. Monsanto also has an extremely poor environmental record, dumping PCBs in ground water for 40 years, and trying to strongarm scientists at the USDA and being regulated by people who formerly worked for them is no formula for safety, no wonder they are allowed to regulate themselves. This is why EU has divested themselves of Monsanto and why Herr Bush had to try and threaten countries like France to open themselves up to this corporate cancer- speaking of which, the World Health Organization used a total of 30 studies to pronounce glyphosate a carcinogen, but Monsanto has already moved on to something even more dangerous- Enlist Duo. Does Agent Orange ring a bell? Fortunately, Monsanto cant hide behind its “science” anymore- Fraley himself admitted they were wrong about glyphosate and that they neglected to take into account weed evolution, must like the idiots who overuse antibiotics and feed them to animals. A Monsanto insider told me awhile back that their old leadership was far more corrupt than the new people there, but it’s a wait and see attitude for now.

You only have to see the disastrous effects Monsanto’s pesticides have had on Hawaii’s flora and fauna to know why it’s banned on Maui, and now in San Diego.

Fund the New Server

The Skepchick Network is a collection of smart and often sarcastic blogs focused on science and critical thinking. The original site is Skepchick.org, founded by Rebecca Watson in 2005 to discuss women’s issues from a skeptical standpoint.